I believe that Linden Lab is quite clear that it wants an open source community. I also believe that, unfortunately, it does not quite realize that when the Lab and the community become partners in an open source project, that there are strings attached.
Morgaine. ================================== On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Mike Monkowski <monko...@fishkill.ibm.com>wrote: > Soft, > > It is not clear whether Linden Lab wants an open source community. The > impression from this side is that Linden wants help fixing bugs, but not > fixing features, but if that requires importing a feature or two, then > it's worth the trouble. > > It is also quite clear that Linden does not want any help in design. > The user experience office hours haven't been hosted by Lindens for more > than a year now and Lindens rarely attend the extension of those > meetings now being run by residents, particularly Jacek Antonelli. > (Thank you Jacek. I'd nominate you for a Hippo Award if Linden still > gave Hippo Awards.) > > You spoke of "understanding each other's needs." I would wager that > there is a near unanimous view in the community that Linden does not > understand the needs of an open source community. Certainly threats of > "throttling" are not among them. Lindens usually speak as if the > failure to understand is entirely on the side of the contributors, and > Lindens are not at all at fault. > > You say "a totally healthy open source project usually can be developed > completely in the open," but this project has never been developed > completely in the open, and the trend is strongly toward closed > development. > > If we understood how we were being "obstructionist" and "in the way of > business," then a conversation could develop. I, personally, don't know > what you are referring to. > > At the moment, the SL open source community is very close to taking the > 1.23.5 code, pulling in a few features from 2.0, and permanently forking > from the standard viewer. I don't think that's good for anyone. > > Mike > > Soft Linden wrote: > > This is a company with an open source project, not an open source > > project with a company. If the community becomes obstructionist enough > > to get in the way of business, the open source part will get throttled > > back. If the community's being largely helpful, open source > > involvement is advanced. I spoke up because this conversation was > > looking a lot like something that could lead to throttling while > > accomplishing nothing. > >... > > A totally healthy open source project usually can be developed > > completely in the open, and in a way that's aligned with everybody's > > interests. But that takes an active commitment on all sides, both in > > terms of composure, and in understanding each others' needs. > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges >
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
